Thunderstick thought we ought to have an entry fee so that someone can win money, but so many dcat readers are only moderately engaged in our little endeavor, many of them are poor, and a shocking number are foreigners from places such as Sussex, Oxford, Johannesburg, and Sydney, and frankly, I don't want to have to deal with their silly currencies.
UPDATE: In a world where new ideas are rare, the Thunderstick and I have just come up with a dandy: We believe that the teams tonight are getting screwed by the system, that there ought to be room for both of them to be in the Dance and that a team such as Air Force probably could yield to Monmouth or Hampton. But better yet, why not have a play-in game between bubble teams? After all, the brunt of the aftermath of Selection Sunday involves discussing who should have gotten in and who should not have. Why not have teams battle it out for those slots? Why not have all of the #13 seeds be up for grabs? Take four bubble teams from major conferences, four from mid-majors and let them face off. You could pit Missouri State v. South Carolina, Air Force v. Michigan, George Mason v. Cincinnati, and Texas A&M v. Hofstra. Who could possibly oppose this idea? It would effectively start things off on the Tuesday before the tournament, and the intensity of these games would be unreal. Such a system would also alleviate the age old Majors or Mid Majors? argument that we engage in every year, and the result would be more March Madness.
Someone call Dickie V and Miles Brand. This idea is too good not to happen.
6 comments:
Roger --
This is how Americans talk. In the contest for global hegemony, we won, you lost. So put down the tea and crumpets, learn to pronounce words right, and get with the program!
Yours,
dcat
Peter --
Thanks for reading. (I'll be in DC next week.)
Of course there will always be disputes, and while I assume your suggestion of a 128 team tournament was facetious, it actually would only require one more round and might be a lot of fun. But the solution that thunderstick and I propose is based less on trying to ameliorate all debate and more on the simple reality that every year 2-3 teams that get in and 2-3 teams that do not are in dispute. Why not have a majors/midmajors challenge that serves as play-in games and resolves that aspect of things once and for all. Sure, it makes for an odd de facto 68 team tournament, but back when there were 48 teams it was not exactly a wieldy process. Having to play in for that 13th seed would be great. And while "there will always be debate," the key should be to work toward the absolute best teams in the tournament.
dcat
Looks like I was wrong. If we all put in $5, then the winner will get $10. I'm taking you down dcat.
By the way, if the other two people on here that like college hoops are interested in joining, when you go to ESPN and search for DCat you have to scroll through a few pages of groups to get to "DCat" since it comes up with every group that has "wildcat" in its name and it orders them by number of members in each group. Needless to say, this group was at the end of the list
I'm whoopin' your ass, Thunderstick, if that is in fact your real name.
I think people on this blog have seen enough of your picks in the NFL playoffs to know how good you are at these things. I'm pretty certain that you've rationalized a way for the final four to be Charlotte, Ohio, UTPB and Williams.
If so, my heart is with Williams, my head with Charlotte.
Post a Comment